Feedback Model of Intelligent Choice

by Bill Ross

A general consensus is rapidly forming among the intelligent and morally aware that our civilization is on an accelerating path to destruction, mainly because criminals appear to be in control and the law has taken the wrong side. The basic fact is that we allow them to act in our name, because we fear the personal cost of defiance. This means we are all complicit in their crimes, to the extent of our non-defiance. We are criminals per the Nuremberg Principles, Nazis, for allowing and being complicit in crimes against peace and humanity. What has really happened is the statistics of humanity (5% leaders, 90% followers, 5% criminals) has been taken advantage of and an inversion has taken place where leaders (those we would willingly follow) have been displaced by criminals (rulers, those we fear to cross). This is a naturally correcting process, since criminals in a leadership position will (and have throughout history) impoverish us until the personal cost of complicity exceeds the cost of defiance. At this point, the majority will discover common survival interest and “starve the leech” by engaging in conflict and denial of resources which destroys the ability of the criminals to function or make a profit. Needless to say, this will cost civilization, as it has so many times throughout history.

The burning question is: What to do? How do we deal with our criminal leaders without destroying civilization? Clearly, correct choices must be made, and soon.

There is no shortage of recommendations such as “return to religious values” from various parties, all recommending that, in one form or another, we impose our philosophy on others or submit to the philosophy of others. The fact is that anyone presenting a “one size fits all” philosophy is trying to arrange matters to their advantage. This is the same old recipe for disaster and conflict. Never forget that the law requires conflict to profit and they have seized a monopoly in this area.

The truth is that we are all in unique environments, with our own unique blend of priorities and acknowledged truth, based on personal experience. So, the answer of “what to do” must come from each of us. Once we all decide, we can then discuss “common interest” and the next form of civilization. What should be clear is the longer we allow the current status quo to exist, the greater the survival cost we must all pay.

Here’s how to properly establish what the true facts of your environment are to make informed choice. Be aware that trusting your personal survival to others is what got you in this mess in the first place. You must make and enforce your own choices. Those whose stated concern is protection of civilization will not help anyone but themselves, and helping themselves means hurting others, including you. Don’t ask anyone else what to do, since, given the opportunity, they will (and have) attempt to arrange matters to their advantage and your detriment.

Definitions:

Knowledge:    A proven relationship between action and consequence or input facts and output truth, with no contrary examples, a scientifically proven fact. An algorithm which, when applied to input facts accurately predicts the consequence. For example, Einstein’s E=m(c squared) is knowledge, since it tells us the energy of a mass can be determined by multiplying the mass by the speed of light squared. If you hurt someone, they (or their family, friends) will retaliate is knowledge.

Intelligence:  The ability to discover and apply knowledge in making informed choice. One who is fully informed and chooses not to act according the facts is not intelligent, since it is action, not words that determines outcomes. Words are useful only to the extent that they cause action from others.

Ruler: One who achieves his goals without engaging in productive activity and therefore does not engage in honest trade, by virtue of having nothing of value to exchange.

Purpose of choice:

Human behavior, which is really intelligent choice in the area of meeting goals, may be considered as a feedback control system, as shown above. The blocks are the various functions contributing to choice interconnected by processed information.

Survival and Choice:

Those who claim that natural law is “unfair” completely misrepresent natural law. Survival of the fittest does not mean “the most powerful.” If it did, we would all be Romans. The truth is that the fittest are those most able to adapt to changing environment, to use time, energy, fact, knowledge and the environment to the best survival advantage.

Darwin claimed/proved that something as innocuous as a random cosmic ray is able to cause a genetic mutation which may confer a statistical survival advantage, which, over time will lead to major survival advantages for species possessing this gene/attribute. Life no longer requires a “Creator.” Diversity is adaptation.

Thus far, only organized religion is offended, no big deal, we can tolerate their dissent, since objective thought will ultimately rule (we hope).

But! The taking of one path over another is a choice. It does not matter that there is no intelligent chooser (i.e.; random cosmic ray caused a genetic choice, a path to be taken). In essence, Darwin proved it is all about CHOICE. This gave the powers that be a major insight both into how to rule and what knowledge must be suppressed at all costs. Mankind must not find out it is all about CHOICE. This is what intelligence does, it CHOOSES. We must not EVER know this. We must not be allowed to CHOOSE. We must instead be blindly reacting to contrived events. All of history/politics since Darwin has been shaped by this. We are in the final stages of a war against intelligence, and it may cost civilization.

Categories of Choice:  

Independent of goal, there are only three ways of achieving any goal. All methods of achieving any transaction (goal) may be proven as either the use of force, fraud or honest trade. A ruler is one who seeks goals without honest trade. From the perspective of rulers intent on controlling your choice, there are only two goal-seeking choices: force and fraud or trickery.

Making a Choice:

The input for intelligent choice is the difference between the desired goal and one’s perception of reality as indicated by the choice of action function which is intelligence. If it is perceived that the goal is met, there is no need for choice. If there is a difference between the desired goal and perception of reality (true result), some choice (action) will be made. This action will cause a response from the environment (true result, nature does not lie or allow contradictions). This result will be perceptually processed and subtracted from the goal. If they are identical, you have made a correct decision and are done.

If, however, the choice was inappropriate, the perceived result will not match the desired result. This means that either the environment has not responded as expected or there is a perceptual error. In either case, your understanding of your environment is incorrect and must be reconsidered. In other words, new knowledge must be sought in the area of action versus consequence of choice. This applies to individuals and groups.

For forceful goal-seeking, rulers will make sure that you are aware that some actions will result in forceful consequences. For example, the choice to refuse to pay taxes will result in seizure of your property and/or loss of freedom. The number of people who actually exhibit the courage to make survival-threatening choices such as this is small enough that the force rulers are willing to keep around is sufficient to deal with these troublesome dissenters. Should all taxpayers act in common interest and refuse to be intimidated, there is no amount of force that can make them comply. This is why it is so important for rulers to maintain the perception that there is no such thing as common interest to usurp cooperation.

For fraudulent methods of goal seeking, rulers have total control of your environment. The goals you choose to seek in life are a product of wants influenced by education, socialization and media such as movies. Your choice of action is dependent on your understanding of reality, which is influenced by education and media. Your perception of the world is also influenced by education and the media.

Should you choose to trust and accept the “official” version of reality and not question your goals, education and information sources, you will make choices consistent with what those who control your reality want you to do. You will be a slave, living a pointless life, not of your own choosing.

Choice of Authority:

This decision feedback model also applies to groups such as government. In this case the goal is chosen based on the perception that it is desired to project to the people combined with the internal goals of the group. The environment will respond to this choice. Media will alter the true result with their own biases, perceptions and goals. This information will filter through the many layers of government bureaucracy, being altered at each step per the perceptions and goals of each layer until a report is made to the ultimate decision-maker who then adds their biases, perceptions and goals prior to making a decision. Based on this organization with many layers between reality and perception, and the ability to add goals contrary to the will of the people affected, top-down government decisions are by nature flawed and no amount of checks or balances can ever fix this. This was a major factor in the collapse of the former Soviet Union and every past civilization. The only way to fix this is by making decisions as close to the facts as possible using goals chosen by those affected. The ideal case is to have people directly make decisions based on the facts, their own unique situation and goals. The only social organization that can possibly work for man is bottom-up decisions and freedom of people to make their own choices. This used to be the organization of western civilization. It has been historically proven to work.

The nature of intelligent choice via perception is scientifically analyzed in “Behavior: The Control of Perception” by William Trevel Powers.